A McCarter Theatre production | Venue: Berlind Theatre | AUDIENCE GUIDE STAFF: Editor for Literary
Content: Carrie Hughes | Editor for Education Content: Paula Alekson | Editorial Administrator: Francine
Schiffman | Web Design: Dimple Parmar | Contributors: Elizabeth Edwards, Paula Alekson, Adam
Immerwahr, Christopher T. Parks, Laurie Sales
Introduction to A Seagull in the Hamptons
In October of 1895, Anton Chekhov wrote to his friend and publisher Alexei Suvorin and let
him know that he was again working on a play. “I am writing it with considerable pleasure,
though I sin frightfully against the conventions of the stage. It is a comedy with three female
roles, six male roles, four acts, a landscape (a view of a lake), much conversation about
literature, little action and five tons of love.”
Chekhov did not yet know all the details of the play he was writing, but the outline is there for
what would become the first of his four major plays: The Seagull. Sins against convention.
Characters. A landscape. Five tons of love.
By disregarding the stage conventions of his time, Chekhov was writing what even today feels
like a remarkably modern play. The first production was a notable failure for reasons
unconnected to the script itself (it was under-rehearsed, and the audience, most of whom
had come to support an actress best known for her success in light French farces, did not
know what to make of the play). Yet the actress M.M. Chitau recalled that “backstage…it was
already being said that The Seagull was written in completely, totally new tones.”
“Chekhov’s tone in The Seagull is bantering, excited, matter-of-fact, or affectionate, but never
somber and never cold. He’d enjoyed writing the play, he let it be known, something rather
rare for him, and the pleasure permeates the text,” observes critic Richard Gilman in his
book Chekhov’s Plays: An Opening Into Eternity. The noted translator Paul Schmidt notes
that Chekhov’s language is “ordinary language.” Because of Chekhov’s innovative style, the
play easily translates to modern times and a contemporary vernacular.
Chekhov was inspired by the lives of people he knew—largely fellow artists—and for a modern
artist, the same is true. Adapter/director Emily Mann reflects that “every single one of these
characters is someone I know. The older actress, her troubled son, the young writer who is
really, really full of himself and isn’t quite as good as he wants to be and can’t quite commit
to a woman—I know them all too well. The young girl who wants to be an actress and falls
madly, insanely in love with the older man who uses her and throws her away—these
beautiful, simple, completely true and real characters—they were true then; they’re true now.
Wherever or whenever you set this play, you will find the truth in it, because that was
Chekhov’s genius.”
Chekhov also took the time to consider the landscape, a sometimes underappreciated
element. He believed in the value of a country retreat; “Congratulations on your new
purchase,” he wrote to his friend Nickolai Leikin in 1885. “I am awfully fond of everything
that goes by the name ‘estate’ in Russia. That word has not yet lost its poetic overtones. You
should enjoy a rest then this summer.” In Mann’s play, the lake becomes an ocean, but the
estate is still an estate—on the shores of Long Island in the constantly shifting social scene
that is the Hamptons.
Indeed, the Hamptons is a natural fit for The Seagull—there is the water, of course, and the
estates, the interplay of those who live and work there and those who visit on vacation. And
there are, and always have been, the artists; Pollock, de Kooning, Vonnegut, Lichtenstein,
Albee and Capote all spent (or spend) significant time there. “I set it in the Hamptons
because it’s where theater folk go, where intellectuals go, in our area, anyway…The
Hamptons is a certain class of New York theater people and New York writers, and people
with money and all of that, and I’ve gone there, so I know it,” explains Mann.
The Hamptons also struggles (and has long struggled) with shifting identities. The
generational divide is apparent there, as the steady increases in real estate values and
development of the twentieth century have accelerated into the dramatic spikes of the
twenty-first. As recently as the 1980s, a moderately successful theater artist might have
been able to buy a small escape in some towns; now long-time visitors find themselves
surrounded by the super-rich (as opposed to the comfortable, or merely rich). More and more
people arrive, but many of the artistic and intellectual New Yorkers who might have gone to
the Hamptons in the 1960s or 70s (or even 80s or 90s) now find it inaccessible.
In 1973, Truman Capote mourned that “some of the potato fields, so beautiful, flat and still,
may not be here next year. And fewer the year after that. New houses are steadily popping up
to mar the long line where the land ends and the sky begins.” The worry was the same, but
the urgency a bit stronger, in 2002, when Edward Albee wrote in the forward to Hamptons
Bohemia, “To walk along the beach in the Hamptons or Montauk (preferably off-season) with
the wind and the sand blowing, the gulls wheeling, and the surf crashing is cleansing and
revivifying. I don’t think that whatever creativity I possess would come into proper focus
without it, and if I become churlish over the suburbanizing of the area, its preposterous
excesses, its denaturalizing, it is simply because fewer and fewer of the young, still poor, not
yet famous creative artists on whom our culture depends are able to know its wonders….”
Still, while its presence may be fading, this artistic history resonates in the Hamptons. It is a
location that reminds visitors of its history, a bit like a contemporary adaptation recalling its
original. Richard Gilman, in his essay on The Seagull, notes that “theater…is the most
cannibalistic of the arts, forever chewing on its own history.” We regularly set out to reexplore classics. A Seagull in the Hamptons is such an exploration: at once a new,
contemporary play and a timeless classic, true to Chekhov’s vision of “a comedy with…four
acts, a landscape…and five tons of love.”
“I gave myself total freedom to just write and respond,” Mann explains as she describes her
adaptation process, “and what came out was actually very faithful to Chekhov and yet also
very contemporary.” While the background is interesting, and the history rich for both the
setting and the original source, A Seagull in the Hamptons also stands alone, ready for its
own responses. Says Mann: “I want the audience to come to it absolutely fresh and with no
preconceptions, and just see how it hits them.”
- Carrie Hughes, production dramaturg
Character Profiles
MARIA
(Arkadina in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
A famous actress in denial of the fact that she is past her prime. She has acquired a certain
amount of wealth, which allows her to maintain a home in the Hamptons, but feels pressured
by the many people who look to her for financial support. She loves her son but does not
understand him, and feels threatened by his disdain for “her” type of theater. Highly insecure,
she has a driving compulsion to be the center of attention at all times.
You know, I’ll share something with you, darling—woman to woman. Do you know I would
never dream of leaving my bedroom—even to go downstairs to get my morning coffee—without
first having showered, dressed, done my hair just so, and—most important, put on my makeup…carefully? … I’ll tell you another secret, dear. I still believe I can get any man I want—
truly! And believe me, that’s half the battle. Oh, and yoga! I do it every morning. Look at
me!
SHE STARTS TO SKIP DOWN THE BEACH, ARMS AKIMBO.
I could still play Juliet! (Act 2)
NICHOLAS
(Sorin in Chekhov’s The Seagull).
Maria’s brother. A retired attorney frustrated by his own unfulfilled dreams of being a writer. A
confirmed bachelor, he is neurotic, self-obsessed, and perpetually tormented by what could
have been. He adores his sister and depends on her financially.
You see, Alex, when I was your age, I only really wanted two things in life—one: to be a
writer, and two: to have a passionate love affair with a gorgeous, talented woman, marry her
and be hopelessly in love with my wife for the rest of my life, Unfortunately, I didn't do that
either…Take heed, my friend… I've ended up a boring, old, retired lawyer—with nothing to
do…and no one to love… It’s actually pretty funny when you think about it— (Act 1)
ALEX
(Konstantin Treplev in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
Maria’s son. Plagued with melancholy and self-doubt, he is constantly trying to win his
mother’s attention and affection. He is fed up with commercial theater and wants to create a
new kind of theater that is “vibrant and young and dangerous and passionate.” He is also
madly in love with Nina, a neighbor.
Why do we have to have theater? I mean, I love my mother but she leads such—a stupid life!
She dedicates every waking hour to something that just doesn’t matter! And you can imagine
how utterly revolting it feels to be me! Here I am at all her stupid parties full of celebrities
and people who have all won prizes for something or other—you know, it’s ridiculous!
Pulitzers and Nobels, and book awards, and Oscars and Tonys and all that crap and here I am!
I have nothing to say for myself; I can’t even understand what they’re talking about half the
time; and they’re all wondering how Maria could have spawned such a pathetic little loser.
(Act 1)
NINA
(Nina in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
The daughter of one of Maria’s neighbors. Young and innocent, she is in love with Alex,
although she does not always understand his abstract approach to theater. She is an aspiring
actress herself, but her family disapproves, labeling theater types like Maria and her set as
“perverted liberals” and “Bohemians.” Nina is in awe of established artists like Maria and
Philip.
Nina
Do you see that house with the flag-pole and the garden in front—down the beach?
Philip
Yes.
Nina
I grew up in that house. You’ve traveled all over the world, I know, and I’ve never really lived
anywhere else. Maybe when I go to college next year—I’ll go someplace far away…(Act 2)
PHILIP
(Trigorin in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
A successful writer somewhat younger than Maria. He is Maria’s boyfriend, but this does not
stop him from running around with “every available woman in New York,” and “the technically
unavailable ones, too.” Though whatever he needs seems to fall easily at his feet, he is
disillusioned with his own success, and suffers from the ennui of the overly admired.
Well, the truth of the matter is, I’m not in control of my life. I’m obsessed by one thought:
the same thought day and night—and that thought is: I should be writing. I should be writing.
I should be writing. … I’m not living. I’m observing living. I am talking to you here and I look
up at the sky for a moment and notice the shape of that cloud formation. Hmmm, I think.
It’s shaped like a grand piano! I should make a note of that … It’s like I’m devouring my own
life. (Act 2)
BEN
(Dorn in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
A local doctor, friend to Maria and Nicholas. He is handsome, easygoing and perceptive—the
person everyone trusts to hear their problems. In his younger days he was “the biggest Don
Juan of them all,” and he still has a way with the ladies. However, he is now too set in his
ways as a bachelor to actually settle down with anyone.
Milly
Can I talk to you?
HE SIGHS
Ben
Why not? It seems to be the night for it.
Milly
Well, I’m sorry to ask, but I just need some advice from someone who isn’t completely crazy
like everyone else in this house. And—and I don’t know why, but I’ve always felt close to
you… […]
Ben
Just tell me what’s wrong, Milly. (Act 1)
LORENZO
(Shamrayev in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
Caretaker and cook at Maria’s summer home. A strong-willed, “impossible” man who is not
afraid to go against Maria, and has no patience for her foolishness or that of anyone else in the
house. He is despised by his wife and daughter.
A SLOW BURN:
The best I can do to have you…chauffeured into New York is the beginning of next week. And
since I, myself, am not a chauffeur I will have to arrange it so that Jose can be freed to drive
you. But not today. Today is impossible, as I’ve explained. Jose is fully booked! (Act 2)
PAULA
(Paulina in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
Lorenzo’s wife, Milly’s mother. She hates her husband, and is desperately in love with Ben,
who returns her affections, though to a lesser degree. She has been waiting for Ben to agree
to her leaving her husband for him for years, and now it is too late. She fluctuates between
angry jealousy and nostalgic sorrow.
Paula
You were with Maria all morning, weren’t you?
Ben
IRRITATED:
Well, yes, I was with Maria all morning. So?
Paula
I’m sorry, I’m so sorry. I just get so jealous. It’s killing me. (Act 2)
MILLY
(Masha in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
Daughter of Lorenzo and Paula. She is in love with Alex and deeply depressed and unhappy
with her lot in life, which drives her to heavy drinking and other self-destructive behavior. She
takes little care of her appearance, and mopes around the house.
Harold
Why do you always wear black? It’s summer for Chrissake!
Milly
I'm in mourning...for my life. I'm unhappy, Harold.
HAROLD
(Medvedenko in Chekhov’s The Seagull)
A schoolteacher who lives in town near Maria’s home in the Hamptons. A relatively poor man
surrounded by the wealthy, he is preoccupied with his lack of wealth. He is out of place in
Maria’s circle, and hopelessly devoted to Milly despite her complete indifference to him.
Harold
Oh, God… can you imagine what it must feel like to be them? … Some people are just born
with it all—looks, talents, money…PLUS they’re madly in love with each other.
Milly
Don’t make me sick.
Harold
I know. Who wants to marry a man who can’t afford his own funeral?
Milly
Look!—Harold! I’m well… touched by your affection; I just can’t return it, okay?
Chekhov Bio
Born on January 29, 1860, in Taganrog, Russia, on the Sea of Azov, Anton Pavlovich Chekhov
would eventually become one of Russia's most cherished storytellers. The son of a grocer and
the grandson of a serf, young Chekhov began working at an early age in his father's grocery
store. When his father fled Taganrog in 1876 to escape his creditors, 16-year-old Chekhov was
left to care for his home and family, which included his mother and three younger siblings.
Chekhov's own family home and shop were auctioned off.
In 1879 Chekhov enrolled as a medical student at the University of Moscow. During his years in
school he wrote humorous stories and sketches under a pen name to help support his family.
After graduating in 1884 with a degree in medicine, he began to freelance as a journalist and
writer of comic sketches. Early in his career, he mastered the form of the one-act and
produced several masterpieces of this genre including The Bear (1888), in which a creditor
hounds a young widow, but becomes so impressed when she agrees to fight a duel with him
that he proposes marriage, and The Wedding (1889), in which a bridegroom's plans to have a
general attend his wedding ceremony backfire when the general turns out to be a retired naval
captain "of the second rank."
His first full-length play, Ivanov, an immature work when compared to his later plays, was
produced in 1887 in Moscow, with not much success, although a subsequent production in St.
Petersberg in 1889 was popular and praised. His next play, The Wood Demon (1889), had
trouble finding a producer and was critically panned. Through the success of his stories and
articles, by 1892 he was able to fulfill his lifelong dream of buying an estate at Melikhovo, near
Moscow. There he entertained himself with gardening, planting entire forests and a cherry
orchard of his own. It was during his stay in Melikhovo in 1895 that Chekhov wrote The Seagull.
Its first performance at the Alexandrinsky Theatre in St. Petersburg in 1896 was so badly
received that Chekhov actually left the auditorium during the second act and vowed never to
write for the theatre again. But in the hands of the Moscow Art Theatre in 1898, The Seagull
was transformed into a critical success.
It was also at the Moscow Art Theatre in 1898 that Chekhov saw the actress Olga Knipper and
soon after wrote to a friend, "Were I to stay in Moscow, I would fall in love with her." By 1901
Chekhov and Knipper were married.
In 1899, Chekhov gave the Moscow Art Theatre a revised version of The Wood Demon, now
titled Uncle Vanya (1899). Along with The Three Sisters (1901) and The Cherry Orchard (1904),
it cemented Chekhov’s important place in the history of modern theatre. However, although
the Moscow Art Theatre productions brought Chekhov great fame, he was never quite happy
with the style that director Konstantin Stanislavsky imposed on the plays. While Chekhov
insisted that most of his plays were comedies, Stanislavsky's productions tended to emphasize
their tragic elements. Still, in spite of their stylistic disagreements, it was not an unhappy
marriage, and these productions brought widespread acclaim to both Chekhov's work and the
Moscow Art Theatre itself.
Chekhov considered his mature plays to be a kind of comic satire, pointing out the unhappy
nature of existence in turn-of-the-century Russia. Perhaps Chekhov's style was described best
by the poet himself when he wrote: "All I wanted was to say honestly to people: 'Have a look at
yourselves and see how bad and dreary your lives are!' The important thing is that people
should realize that, for when they do, they will most certainly create another and better life
for themselves. I will not live to see it, but I know that it will be quite different, quite unlike
our present life."
During Chekhov's final years, he was forced to live in exile from the intellectuals of Moscow. In
March of 1897, he suffered a lung hemorrhage, and although he still made occasional trips to
Moscow to participate in the productions of his plays, he was forced to spend most of his time
in the Crimea for the sake of his health. He died of tuberculosis on July 14, 1904, at the age of
forty-four, in a German health resort and was buried in Moscow.
Adapted from the Uncle Vanya study guide, by Laurie Sales
ARTISTS IN THE HAMPTONS – by Elizabeth Edwards
Emily Mann’s A Seagull in the Hamptons transports Anton Chekhov’s The Seagull, a play about
theater artists and writers on a Russian lakeside estate, to the modern American seaside. Mann
herself notes the aptness of her selected setting: “I set it in the Hamptons because it’s where
theater folk go, where intellectuals go, in our area, anyway. …. The Hamptons is a certain class
of New York theater people and New York writers, and people with money and all of that, and
I’ve gone there, so I know it.”
Indeed, this haven of beach and farmland has long attracted artists of all varieties, who come
seeking a place of retreat from nearby New York City. As early as the nineteenth century,
writers such as James Fenimore Cooper and Walt Whitman have found inspiration in the
picturesque locale, and their depictions of the place in their novels and poems have enticed
other artists to the region in turn.
A cyclical pattern has since developed: a handful of artists find some corner of the Hamptons,
fall in love with the area, and settle in. They form societies which draw fellow and aspiring
artists to the area, who are soon followed by the admiring and the curious. Many who come for
a brief visit end up deciding to stay, caught up in the famed Hamptons “landlust.” Then the
next generation of artists arrives and are either unable to get along with the previous group of
artists for aesthetic reasons, or unable to afford the ever-rising real estate prices. They find a
new corner of the Hamptons in which to settle, and the cycle repeats itself once more.
At the end of the nineteenth century, the first major organized group of artists traveled to the
Hamptons to explore the southern coast of Long Island. They called themselves the Tile Club
(because of their tradition of painting ceramic tiles when they gathered together in one
another’s studios), and in 1874 they rode the relatively new Long Island Rail Road from Babylon
to Montauk, chronicling their trip in an article in Scribner’s Monthly. Their favorite village was
East Hampton, which they identified as a place “marked with the artistic consciousness,”
where inhabitants “set out their milk-pans to drain in beautiful compositions” and “are all the
time posing for effect.”
This glowing description drew artists in droves, and by 1883 the easels and sunshades that
dotted the nearby countryside had earned the village a reputation as “the American Barbizon”
(a reference to the French hamlet forty miles southeast of Paris that was itself a well-known
artists’ haven). Many of East Hampton’s artistic visitors formed informal societies to learn new
techniques and critique one another’s work. Thomas Moran, famed painter known for his
panoramas of Yellowstone and friend of several of the “Tilers,” erected his own studioresidence in East Hampton, which became a natural center of artistic gatherings whenever his
many creatively talented relatives came to visit. His son and nephews would provide musical
entertainment on guitar, mandolin, and violin, and family and friends alike would pose in
period costumes to present tableaux vivants, or “living pictures.”
Meanwhile, a Tile Club member named William Merritt Chase was establishing the Hamptons’
first formal school of outdoor painting, the Shinnecock Summer School of Art, over in
Southampton. Students biked along country roads until they found a subject for painting that
appealed to them, then returned to the school’s main building for personal critiques by Chase
himself, which were conducted with such dramatic flair that they became a draw for local
spectators.
Another wave of artists arrived in the 1920s, when five New York City writers—Ring Lardner,
Grantland Rice, Irwin S. Cobb, Percy Hammond, and John Wheeler—moved to East Hampton in
search of clean air and a quiet country life. These five were good friends, and their presence
in the Hamptons brought numerous other New York journalists to the area for weekend visits.
The Great Depression placed a temporary damper on the artistic development of the
Hamptons, but World War II had the opposite effect. As upheaval swept across Europe, many
artists, writers, and intellectuals traveled to America to flee Nazi persecution. These included
poet André Breton, printmaker Stanley Williams, and painter Max Ernst—members of the newly
developing Surrealist movement. New York City, America’s acknowledged cultural capitol, was
the most natural destination for these exiles, and the Hamptons provided the perfect retreat
for Europeans accustomed to migrating from city to countryside in the summer months.
With more abstract emphases than their artistic predecessors, these experimental artists did
not require the coastal scenery and charming villages of the Hamptons’ traditional resort
sections (which, in any event, were by now generally prohibitively expensive) to inspire them.
Instead, they settled in smaller hamlets further inland—like Springs, where Stanley William
Hayter, head of the experimental Parisian printmaking studio Atelier 17, rented a primitive
shack. In the summer of 1945, Hayter’s assistant invited his friends Jackson Pollock and Lee
Krasner to the shack for the month of August, and they, too, fell under the sway of Hamptons
landlust. Within months, they had purchased a residence of their own and moved in, becoming
the center of a new influx of artists from the school of Abstract Expressionism, including
Conrad Marca-Relli, William de Kooning and Alfonso Ossorio.
By this point an infrastructure of galleries, critics, and collectors had been solidly established
in the Hamptons, making the area a natural destination for members of subsequent visual arts
movements—particularly those eager to test the boundaries of artistic experimentation outside
the high-pressure scrutiny of the urban art world. These included Pop artists such as Andy
Warhol and Roy Lichtenstein, as well as a number of unclassifiable sculptors, photographers
and artisans like William King and Dan Flavin, all of whom found freedom and acceptance as
visitors or residents of the Hamptons during the 1960s.
In addition to visual artists of all varieties, a number of influential writers also congregated in
the Hamptons in the mid-twentieth century. John Steinbeck rented a house in Sag Harbor in
1953 to work on his novel Sweet Thursday. By 1975 Hamptons residents included such wellknown authors as Kurt Vonnegut, Peter Matthiessen, P. G. Wodehouse, Joseph Heller and
Truman Capote. The Bridgehampton saloon Bobby Van’s served as a watering hole for these
and many other literary giants of the era.
Theater artists, too, have long been drawn to the Hamptons. In 1962, playwright Edward Albee
drove to Montauk to visit actress Uta Hagen, and felt compelled to purchase his own parcel of
land there. In 1967 he also purchased a former stable in the area, which he turned into a
seasonal retreat for artists and writers that is still in operation today. During the late 1960s,
actress and Off-Off-Broadway producer Gaby Rodgers staged a series of theatrical events in the
backyards of some of her friends in East Hampton. Painters, writers, and other artists would
be drafted to participate in these free-ranging displays of performance art. In the early 1990s,
fabric designer Jack Lenor Larsen built the LongHouse Reserve—landscaped gardens that host
performances of music, dance and theater. And in the hamlet of Water Mill, avant-garde stage
director Robert Wilson has built a laboratory specially designed for experimental theater and
design projects.
Expansion and rising prices in the Hamptons have in recent years diminished both the natural
views that have long drawn artists to the East End, and the capacity for up-and-coming writers,
painters, poets and theater-makers to join the ranks of Hamptons residents. Many former
artists’ studios have been destroyed or converted to private homes. A select few, however,
such as the former home of Jackson Pollock and the Moran studio, still remain as memorials,
and many artists with homes in the area that are of historic interest are making arrangements
to preserve their property for posterity. A final testament to the artistic history of the
Hamptons is Green River Cemetery, the resting place of choice for East End artists including
Jackson Pollock, James Brooks, Jimmy Ernst, A. J. Liebling and Frank O’Hara. The cemetery
has become so popular that the management has had to purchase additional land, and many
visitors make their way to the cemetery each year to pay their respects to some of the
trailblazers who have kept the artistic spirit of the Hamptons alive over the past hundred
years.
Who’s Who in the Production
CAST
Brian Murray
Maria Tucci
Maria, an actress
Nicholas, her
brother
Larry Pine
Daniel Oreskes
Ben, a doctor
Lorenzo, the
Morena Baccarin
Stark Sands
Nina, the daughter
of a neighbor
Alex, her son
Jacqueline
Antaramian
caretaker and cook
Paula, his wife
David Andrew
Macdonald
Philip, a writer
Laura Heisler
Matthew Maher
Milly, their daughter
Harold, a school
ARTISTIC STAFF
Adapter/Director
Emily Mann
Set Design
Eugene Lee
Costume Design
Jennifer von Mayrhauser
Lighting Design
Jane Cox
Composer
Baikida Carroll
Sound Design
Karin Graybash
Producing Director
Mara Isaacs
Director of Production
David York
Production Stage Manager
Cheryl Mintz
Casting Director
Laura Stanczyk, CSA
Stage Manager
Alison Cote
teacher
Interview with Emily Mann
Artistic Director Emily Mann’s productions of Chekhov’s plays—The Three
Sisters, The Cherry Orchard and Uncle Vanya—are among McCarter's most
renowned. As a director and adaptor she seems to have a natural ear for
understanding Chekhov and translating it into a world that is all at once
accessible, entertaining, touching and hilarious. For the final play of
McCarter’s 2007-2008 season she will direct the fourth of Chekhov’s major
plays, The Seagull, in her own free adaptation, A Seagull in the Hamptons.
She spoke with McCarter Literary Manager Carrie Hughes about the play and
her long collaboration with Chekhov.
CH: This will be your fourth production of Chekhov’s major work, and you have adapted three
of them yourself. Maybe we could just start by talking about Chekhov.
EM: I suppose what’s most interesting to me about my relationship with Chekhov is I’ve been
thinking about him most of my conscious life. I read The Seagull in high school and I loved it
because I understood the young people--Nina, of course, and Treplev-- and how awful the
adults were, and how they’d all betrayed the children. I just thought it was 'a cool play'. Of
course, I didn't really understand the play, not in its entirety. I didn’t feel ready to direct any
of Chekhov's plays until I was almost 40. Ironically, The Seagull is the last one I feel ready to
direct. Until I understood the adults-- really understood them — I couldn’t do it.
So I’ve been thinking about Seagull since I was 17 or 18 years old, and I realized a couple of
years ago I didn’t want to see it done in the old way. For me it is a very modern play. It hasn’t
dated. For the last few summers we’ve been going out to our friends’ in the Hamptons, and I
suddenly one day pictured the play on the beach, set now. I could picture the house and I
could hear the scenes.
We went off to Ireland two summers ago, and I brought some old terrible translations of
Seagull that were in the public domain with me. I gave myself total freedom to just write and
respond and what came out was actually very faithful to Chekhov and yet also very
contemporary. I think because I knew the play so well, it came out in a flood. It was effortless
and thrilling and I thought, you know, this feels right.
CH: What made you start doing your own adaptations of Chekhov?
EM: The simple answer is I wanted to get closer to him.
I felt that Lanford Wilson [whose
translation of Three Sisters I directed], as beautiful as his translation was, Lanford was
between me and Chekhov. I wanted to get directly in contact with Chekhov as if he were in
the room with me, as if we were in conversation-- and the only way I knew how to do that
was by wrestling word for word with him.
I had to work with someone who knows the language intimately, so I sat down with [Princeton
Russian literature professor] Ellen Chances and a million literal translations and went through
every line with her. The first one I adapted was Cherry Orchard in 2000, and when I did a draft
without her, just with the clunky translations, she had a note on every line. By the time I
showed her Seagull, which is actually the most free, she said, this is the most accurate
translation of this play I can imagine. I had the essence of it. I think it’s from having gotten to
know Chekhov that intimately on a word to word level on those other adaptations that Seagull
could just fly out of me.
CH: Why set this play in the present day?
EM:
Every single one of these people is someone I know. The older actress, her troubled son,
the young writer who is really, really full of himself and isn’t quite as good as he wants to be
and can’t quite commit to a woman--I know them all too well. The young girl who wants to be
an actress and falls madly, insanely in love with the older man who uses her and throws her
away--these beautiful, simple, completely true and real characters, they were true then;
they’re true now. Wherever or whenever you set this play, you will find the truth in it, because
that was Chekhov’s genius.
I also wanted to blow off the dust that has covered up the fun, the humor and all the deep,
deep drama of his work and be simple and alive and now. That is what he wanted when he
wrote it. If I see another one of these Seagull’s that doesn’t get a laugh and everyone’s in a
corset, I’m going to scream. Chekhov was a stage rat. He knew what a funny line was. He
knew actors. He understood what would and wouldn’t work on stage. He understood
the humor in everyday misery. Everyday joy. Theater people revere him because he was the
ultimate humanist.
CH: Do you have anything else you want the audience to know?
EM: You know the way Edward Albee said that I wish you’d come to see this play as if this
were the first play you’d ever seen…I feel the same way, and if you can’t do that than at least
come as if this is the first Seagull you’ve ever seen. I want the audience to come to it
absolutely fresh and with no preconceptions and just see how it hits them. I think that if you
come with your idea of what Chekhov should be or what The Seagull should be or what a play
should be, for that matter, you’ll miss out on a real experience.
Emily Mann Bio
Emily Mann (Director, Adapter, Artistic Director/Resident
Playwright) Multi-award-winning Director and Playwright Emily
Mann is in her 18th season as Artistic Director of McCarter
Theatre. Under Ms. Mann’s leadership, McCarter was honored with
the 1994 Tony Award for Outstanding Regional Theater. Directing
credits include Nilo Cruz’s Pulitzer Prize-winning Anna in the
Tropics with Jimmy Smits (also on Broadway); the world premiere
of Christopher Durang’s Miss Witherspoon with Kristine Nielsen
(also off-Broadway); Uncle Vanya with Amanda Plummer (also
adapted); All Over with Rosemary Harris and Michael Learned
(also off-Broadway; 2003 Obie Award for Directing); The Cherry
Orchard with Jane Alexander, John Glover and Avery Brooks (also
adapted); Three Sisters with Frances McDormand, Linda Hunt and
Mary Stuart Masterson; A Doll House with Cynthia Nixon and The
Glass Menagerie with Shirley Knight. Her plays include the awardwinning Execution of Justice; Still Life (six Obie Awards);
Greensboro (A Requiem) and Annulla, An Autobiography. Ms. Mann wrote and directed Having
Our Say, adapted from the book by Sarah L. Delany and A. Elizabeth Delany with Amy Hill
Hearth (Tony nominations, Best Director and Play; NAACP Award; Joseph Jefferson Award;
Peabody and Christopher Awards for her screenplay). A winner of the Dramatists’ Guild HullWarriner Award, she is a member of the Dramatists Guild and serves on its Council. In 2002, she
received an Honorary Doctorate of Arts from Princeton University. A collection of her plays,
Testimonies: Four Plays, has been published by Theatre Communications Group, Inc. Her latest
play, Mrs. Packard, was the recipient of the 2007 Kennedy Center Fund for New American Plays
Award and will be published by TCG in Spring 2008. Most recently, Ms. Mann directed the world
premiere of Edward Albee’s Me, Myself & I.
EDUCATORS INTRODUCTION
Welcome to the McCarter Audience Guide educator materials for A Seagull in the Hamptons.
This guide has been assembled to complement both your students’ theater-going experience
and your class curriculum by offering a variety of interesting and edifying activities for both
pre-show and post-performance instruction and enjoyment.
This production of A Seagull in the Hamptons, Emily Mann’s adaptation of Anton Chekhov’s
classic Russian comedy, affords opportunities for enrichment in historical and cultural studies,
language arts, theater and media/visual arts. Students can explore the play’s characters and
themes as presented by the nineteenth-century playwright in his original work, and consider
and critique those characters and themes as transposed and interpreted by a twenty-firstcentury adaptor/director in a production much closer to home in time and place; make
investigations into the world of the Pre-Revolutionary Russian Intelligentsia-- the rich historical
culture in which Chekhov lived and worked, and which he represented on stage. They will be
encouraged to creatively contemplate these topics and themes in imaginative, artistic
activities. Teachers can also link their classroom directly with McCarter Theatre via McCarter’s
Blog (www.mccarter.org/blog), which can be used to gain insight into the artistic process and
post comments regarding the production as it moves from pre-production into rehearsal and
performance.
Our student audiences are often our favorite audiences at McCarter, and we encourage you and
your students to join us for a live and lively conversation with members of the cast after the
performance. Our visiting artists are always impressed with the preparation and thoughtfulness
of McCarter’s young audiences, and the post-performance discussion offers a unique
opportunity for students to engage intellectually with professional theater practitioners. We
look forward to seeing all of you for a wonderful discussion with artistic director, resident
playwright, adaptor and director Emily Mann about A Seagull in the Hamptons.
CORE CURRICULUM STANDARDS
According to the NJ Department of Education, “experience with and knowledge of the arts is a
vital part of a complete education.” Our production of A Seagull in the Hamptons and the
activities outlined in this guide are designed to enrich your students’ education by addressing
the following specific Core Curriculum Standards for Visual and Performing Arts:
1.1
All students will acquire knowledge and skills that increase aesthetic awareness in dance,
music, theater and visual arts.
1.2
All students will refine perceptual, intellectual, physical and technical skills through
creating dance, music, theater and/or visual arts.
1.3
All students will demonstrate an understanding of the elements and principles of dance,
music, theater and visual arts.
1.4 All students will demonstrate knowledge of the process of critique.
All students will identify the various historical, social and cultural influences and
1.5 traditions which have generated artistic accomplishments throughout the ages and which
continue to shape contemporary arts.
1.6
All students will develop design skills for planning the form and function of space,
structures, objects, sounds and events.
Viewing A Seagull in the Hamptons and then participating in the pre- and post-show
discussions suggested in this audience guide will also address the following Core Curriculum
Standards in Language Arts Literacy:
3.2
All students will write in clear, concise, organized language that varies in content and
form for different audiences and purposes.
3.3
All students will speak in clear, concise, organized language that varies in content and
form for different audiences and purposes.
3.4
All students will listen actively to information from a variety of sources in a variety of
situations.
3.5
All students will access, view, evaluate and respond to print, non-print and electronic
texts and resources.
In addition, the production of A Seagull in the Hamptons, as well as the audience guide
activities, will help to fulfill the following Social Studies Core Curriculum Standards:
6.1
All students will utilize historical thinking, problem solving and research skills to
maximize their understanding of civics, history, geography and economics.
6.6
All students will apply knowledge of spatial relationships and geographic skills to
understand human behavior in relation to the physical and cultural environment.
PRE-SHOW PREPARATION, QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION,
AND ACTIVITIES
Note to Educators: Use the following assignments, questions and activities to prepare for Emily Mann’s A
Seagull in the Hamptons and to introduce your students to Anton Chekhov’s The Seagull and its
intellectual origin, historical context, and themes, as well as to engage their imaginations and creativity
before they see the production. The first three exercises below do not require reading Anton Chekhov’s
The Seagull. The remaining exercises are based upon a reader’s familiarity with the original text. [We
recommend the English language translations by Paul Schmidt and Laurence Senelick.]
1. PROFILING THE CHARACTERS BEFORE THE SHOW. Have your students read the “Character
Profiles” section of this audience guide to familiarize themselves with the characters they
will meet in A Seagull in the Hamptons.
ƒ
Discuss with them what expectations they have of the play and its dramatic
content based upon the character descriptions.
ƒ
Have students brainstorm a list of themes and potential conflicts that could
arise in and between characters in the course of the play given the
descriptions of each character’s personality.
ƒ
Ask students if any of the character descriptions remind them of a
character they have encountered before in literature, on film, in a play or
personally.
ƒ
Ask them to imagine what each character looks and acts like and how they
might speak. You can have your students take this one step further by
having them go online to find photographs of people to cast in their own
fantasy production of A Seagull in the Hamptons.
2. HISTORICIZING THE CHEKHOVIAN LANDSCAPE. To prepare your students for Emily Mann’s A
Seagull in the Hamptons, and to deepen their level of understanding of Anton Chekhov’s
original play along with the period, place and culture which inspired it, have them
research, either in groups or individually, the life, times and works of Chekhov. Topics for
a study of Chekhov and late-nineteenth century Russia and Russian culture might include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Anton Pavlovich Chekhov
ƒ
birth, family and
education
ƒ
adulthood, life and work
ƒ
Melikhovo period: 1892–98
ƒ
Yalta period: 1899–1904
ƒ
death and legacy
The first night of The Seagull
(17 October 1896) at the
Alexandrinsky Theatre in
Petersburg
Moscow Art Theatre
Konstantin Stanislavsky
(Theatrical) Realism
Russian History (second half of
the nineteenth century)
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Intelligentsia/Russian Intelligentsia
Serfdom
(Theatrical) Realism
Chekhov’s other masterworks:
ƒ Uncle Vanya
ƒ Three Sisters
ƒ The Cherry Orchard
Russian History (second half of the
nineteenth century)
Intelligentsia/Russian Intelligentsia
Serfdom
The Romanov Dynasty
ƒ
Nicholas I
ƒ
Alexander II
ƒ
Alexamder III
ƒ
Nicholas II
Have your students teach one another about their individual or group topics via oral and
illustrated (i.e., posters or PowerPoint) reports. Following the presentations:
ƒ
Ask your students to reflect upon their research process and discoveries.
ƒ
Ask them to consider, given their newfound knowledge of the original play's
historical context, what challenges an artist would face in attempting to
adapt a play written for this time to a modern setting for a modern
audience.
3. DUELING (AND ACTING) SEAGULLS: PUTTING A SEAGULL IN THE HAMPTONS AND CHEKHOV’S THE SEAGULL
ON THEIR (WEBBED) FEET. To fully appreciate both Emily Mann’s artistry as an adaptor and
Chekhov’s original play (and its complex characters, comedy, mood and attitude), break
your students up into scene-study groups and assign them the same dramatic portions from
Act II of A Seagull in the Hamptons (Seagull in the Hamptons play excerpt) and The
Seagull to rehearse on their feet for presentation for the class. Each group should divvy up
parts and elect an “actor-manager” to run the rehearsal(s). Following scene presentations
(you might choose to have the Chekhov performed prior to Mann’s version), lead students
in a discussion of their experience in performing both the contemporary adaptation and its
Chekhovian predecessor. Questions might include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
What are the pleasures and challenges of performing in Chekhov’s
original version?
What was your experience of performing in the more contemporary
version?
What insights regarding any of A Seagull in the Hamptons’s or The
Seagull’s characters did you gain from putting or seeing them on their
feet?
What about the characters struck you as particularly realistic when
performing the roles?
Was there any moment that felt strange or awkward in bringing your
character to life?
Where do you think the comedy lies in either version?
If you were required to perform in a production of A Seagull in the
Hamptons or The Seagull, which version would you choose and which
character would you be most interested in playing and why?
4. ON THE PAGE: CHEKHOV’S THE SEAGULL, CIRCA 1895. Have your students read Anton Chekhov’s
The Seagull in translation either aloud in class or as a homework assignment. Following
their reading, explore with them the various avenues of dramatic/dramaturgical and
thematic reflection below through discussion and/or short answer and essay writing.
ƒ
Ask your students to make an annotated cast of characters list (on paper or
on the board) in which they provide a detailed description of each
character, including his or her occupation or personal pursuit,
characteristics of personality, and relationship to the central characters of
the play.
ƒ
Ask your students to collaborate (in large or small groups) on a tensentence play summary of The Seagull. Note that a “plot” summary
describes the play in terms of a sequence of events (e.g., this happens,
then this, etc.). They should write a “play” summary which considers the
overall story or journey of the play and its key events and characters,
themes, ideas, etc. They can’t or shouldn’t mention everything; they only
have ten sentences. Summaries can be shared aloud and students can
choose which summary most effectively captures the overall essence of the
dramatic journey of The Seagull; students should be encouraged to indicate
what made the winning composition an effective play summary.
ƒ
Ask your students to discuss the central themes of the play, which include:
generational conflict (between parents and children); the artistic
experience (i.e., its splendors and miseries); artistic idealism vs.
commercialism; facility/ability vs. aspiration and talent vs. lack of talent
(i.e., purposeless talent vs. diligent mediocrity); accepting one’s lot vs.
destroying one’s self; what is remembered vs. what is forgotten. Have
them select moments from the play in which these themes are dramatically
presented.
ƒ
Ask your students if any of these themes seem more important to them
than others. Urge them to explain their responses. Can they identify
personally with any of these themes? Ask them to provide examples from
their own experience.
ƒ
Discuss other plays or works of literature your students have read or
studied with similar themes.
5. “DEAR DIARY: SO, HERE I AM AT SORIN’S ESTATE AND YOU WON’T BELIEVE WHAT JUST HAPPENED!...”
After having your students read Chekhov’s The Seagull, have each of them select a pair of
characters from the play—one old and one young (i.e., Konstantin Treplev and Arkadina,
Nina and Arkadina, Nina and Trigorin, Konstantin Treplev and Trigorin, Medvedenko and
Dorn, etc.)—and have them write two or three “diary entries” from each character’s
perspective describing life (or vacation) out in the country. Have them consider which
happenings each character would know about from first-hand experience, what each
would focus upon and how their perceptions and attitudes would differ. Students should
try as best they can to stay true to their characters’ personalities and to the general ideas
and world of the play. Students’ diary entries may be read aloud for the class’s pleasure
and discussed for the merits of their content, attention to dramatic and character detail,
and the imagination and originality of their authors.
6. ENVISIONING THE SEAGULL: DESIGN COLLAGE PROJECT. Theatrical visual designers, such as
those who create a play production’s scenery, costumes, makeup and lights, must find
ways to communicate their preliminary design ideas to the director with whom they
collaborate. One form of visual communication is collage, in which cutout images and
text, material/fabric and other small objects are glued to a piece of paper to symbolize
the spirit of the play. Ask your students make a design collage for Chekhov’s The Seagull.
ƒ
First, students should read Chekhov’s The Seagull. Instruct them to record
their visual, intellectual and psychological/spiritual impressions of the
play—its world, inhabitants, mood and theme—in words as they read. In
other words, they should document the images, ideas and feelings or
emotions invoked in them as they experience the play through reading.
ƒ
Next, students should think of ways to communicate their initial
impressions visually, keeping in mind place, time, theme mood, style,
color, texture, scale and movement. They should seek out images online
and in magazines, and collect small objects and fabric/material for their
design collage.
ƒ
They will need an 8½” x 11” sheet of paper (either colored paper or paper
that can be painted), scissors, glue, additional colored paper for cutouts,
and magic markers, colored pencils or paint for a background.
ƒ
Students should consider the placement of collage materials. What do they
intend to employ to grab the viewer’s eye? How do they want the viewer
to look at and experience the collage?
ƒ
Educators might also opt to have their students create electronic collages
by utilizing PowerPoint technology and images gleaned from the Internet.
ƒ
Students should be given time to show their finished collages to the class
and to explain how the objects, images and words in their collages express
and symbolize The Seagull for them.
Please send any noteworthy collages to McCarter Theatre, Education Department, 91
University Place, Princeton, NJ 08540; we would love to see them!
POST-SHOW QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND ACTIVITIES
Note to Educators: Use the following assignments, questions and activities to have students
evaluate their experience of the performance of A Seagull in the Hamptons, as well as to
encourage their own imaginative and artistic projects through further exploration of the play
in production. Consider also that some of the pre-show activities might enhance your
students’ experience following the performance.
1. A SEAGULL IN THE HAMPTONS: A DISCUSSION. Following their attendance at the performance of
A Seagull in the Hamptons, ask your students to reflect on the questions below. You might
choose to have them answer each individually or you may divide students into groups for
round-table discussions. Have them consider each question, record their answers and then
share their responses with the rest of the class.
Questions to Ask Your Students About the Play in Production
a. What was your overall reaction to A Seagull in the Hamptons? Did you find
the production compelling? Stimulating? Intriguing? Challenging?
Memorable? Confusing? Evocative? Unique? Delightful? Meaningful?
Explain your reactions.
b. What were the most compelling themes in the play? If you read A Seagull
beforehand, did experiencing the play heighten your awareness or
understanding of the play’s themes? [generational conflict (between
parents and children); the artistic experience (i.e., its splendors and
miseries); artistic idealism vs. commercialism; facility/ability vs. aspiration
and talent vs. lack of talent (i.e., purposeless talent vs. diligent
mediocrity); accepting one’s lot vs. destroying one’s self; what is
remembered vs. what is forgotten.] What themes were made even more
apparent in performance? Were there any other themes you could come up
with that were pervasive throughout? Explain your responses.
c. Do you think that the pace and tempo of the production were effective and
appropriate? Explain your opinion.
Questions to Ask Your Students About the Characters
a. Did you personally identify with any of the characters in A Seagull in the
Hamptons? Who? Why?
b. What qualities were revealed by the action and speech of the characters?
Explain your ideas.
c. Did any characters develop or undergo a transformation during the course
of the play? Who? How? Why?
d. In what ways did the characters reveal the themes of the play? Explain
your responses.
Questions to Ask Your Students About the Style and Design of the Production
a. Was there a moment in A Seagull in the Hamptons that was so compelling
or intriguing that it remains with you in your mind’s eye? Can you write a
vivid description of that moment? As you write your description, pretend
that you are writing about the moment for someone who was unable to
experience the performance.
b. Did the style and design elements of the production enhance the
performance? Did anything specifically stand out to you? Explain your
reaction.
c. How did the production style and design reflect the themes of the play?
d. What mood or atmosphere did the lighting design establish or achieve?
Explain your experience.
e. How did the sound design enhance your overall experience?
f. Did the design of the costumes and makeup serve to illuminate the
characters, themes and style of the play? How?
2. “GET[TING] DIRECTLY IN CONTACT WITH CHEKHOV”: ADAPTING/TRANSPOSING/ TRANSFORMING THE
SEAGULL . Have your students read the “Interview with Emily Mann” in this audience guide
to familiarize themselves with Mann’s interest in, reasons for and process of adapting
Chekhov.
Theatrical adaptation involves the rewriting of a dramatic text, utilizing the original work
as raw material. Adaptation can entail the relatively straightforward transposition of a
play’s original place and time with minor changes in character and/or dialogue necessary
for the play’s new context—A Seagull in the Hamptons is this sort of adaptation. Other
approaches to adaptation involve extensive changes to text, narrative content and even
meaning (e.g., cuts in text/dialogue, rearrangement of narrative/story, stylistic changes, a
different dramatic focus, elimination/addition of characters or locations, a collage of
foreign elements/texts, a different ending. Lookingglass Theatre’s Lookingglass Alice and
Heiner Müller’s Hamletmachine are both this latter sort of adaptation.)
Considering Mann’s A Seagull in the Hamptons
ƒ If your students have not already read Chekhov’s classic Russian comedy
The Seagull, have them do so. (You might choose to use either Paul
Schmidt’s or Laurence Senelick’s translation)
ƒ
Then ask your students to compare Emily Mann’s adaptation of A Seagull in
the Hamptons with their experience of Chekhov’s original (in translation).
The following questions might be helpful as jumping off points:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
How effective was the transposition of the play’s setting
from a Russian country estate circa 1895 to a Hamptons
beach house in the present day?
Did these changes alter your perception or reception of the
play, its characters, world and themes? Explain your
response.
Given your experience with Chekhov’s original work (in
translation) do you think these adaptation choices by Emily
Mann worked? Why or why not?
Did some aspects of the adaptation work better than others
for you? Explain your response by providing examples.
Did the experiencing of viewing the performance of A
Seagull in the Hamptons give you a better understanding of
or insight into Chekhov’s The Seagull? Explain your
response.
Would you be interested in seeing a production of
Chekhov’s The Seagull for purposes of comparison?
Considering Your Seagull
ƒ Get your students “directly in contact with Chekhov” through the process
of writing their own simple adaptations of a dramatic moment from The
Seagull. Working in small groups, students should choose one of the
following dramatic moments for present-day adaptation (or they may adapt
a dramatic moment of their own choosing):
ƒ
Act I, the dramatic moment just after the interrupted
performance of Treplev’s play, beginning with Treplev’s
line, “Enough! Curtain!,” and ending with Dorn’s speech
alone which begins with, “I don’t know, maybe I’m
confused or I’m crazy,” and ends with “Oh, I think he’s
coming this way.”
ƒ
Act II, the dramatic moment in which Sorin enters with
Nina and Medvedenko behind him with the wheelchair,
beginning with Sorin’s line, “Are we? Are we having fun?
Are we happy today, when’s all said and done?” and ending
with Sorin’s line, “Yes, yes, this is awful…But he won’t
leave, I’ll talk it over with him. (THEY leave.)”
ƒ
Act IV, the dramatic moment in which Treplev enters back
into the drawing room from outside with Nina beginning
with Treplev’s line, “Nina! Nina! It’s you…you…” and
ending at the play’s end.
ƒ
In addition to choosing a dramatic moment for adaptation, each group of
adaptors should choose where they would like to set the play, and should
feel completely free to modify the characters and dialogue accordingly for
the play’s new context.
ƒ
Conduct readings of each adaptation followed by a class discussion (urge
your students to focus their analysis and critique on the adaptations
themselves and not the performances). Ask your students if there was an
adaptation that they thought was best. Ask them to explain why it is that
they found it to be superior to the other adapted dramatic moments.
Seagullmachine: The Advanced (and Radical) Adaptation Project.
ƒ Interested in an extreme adventure in adaptation? Have your students read
and compare Shakespeare’s Hamlet with Heiner Müller’s radical adaptation
Hamletmachine (online at www.efn.org/~dredmond/ Hamletmachine.PDF).
After exposing students to Müller’s brand of adaptation and discussing the
compelling aspects of Hamletmachine and its dramatic merit and
challenges/problems, have your students consider one of the above
moments from The Seagull for a new radical interpretation/adaptation.
Students should be able to explain (and defend if necessary) their approach
and choices. [Warning: This exercise is not for the faint of heart adaptor.
Adapt at your own risk!]
3. WHAT’S SO (NOT) FUNNY?: CHEKHOVIAN COMEDY. In the plays of Chekhov, comedy never
actually manifests itself in jokes, zany characters, humorous situations, ridiculous
behavior, ludicrous occurrences or happy endings as it did in the popular stage comedies of
his day or does today in the popular comedies of stage and screen. Comedy to Chekhov
was less about structure, humorous ingredients and the provocation of laughter, and more
about style, philosophy, the audience and recognition of the human condition and disease.
Ask your students to consider the two following quotations from Vera Gottlieb’s chapter on
“Chekhov’s Comedy” from The Cambridge Companion to Chekhov:
“First of all I'd get my patients in a laughing mood - and only then would I
begin to treat them'” Chekhov's words sum up the motivation for his comedy:
laughter as medicine, and a vital prerequisite for any treatment of his fellow
human beings. Implicit is the sense that laughter— and comedy—are
restorative, and that the objectivity and detachment which laughter may
produce could inoculate us against such human diseases as pomposity,
hypocrisy, self-centredness, laziness, or—the worst of all—wasting
life.[…]Chekhov's comedy is therefore not only a stylistic feature in his works,
but is also a vital part of his philosophy. It is the point where content and
form meet, the one usually inseparable from the other. And this, in turn,
relates to the subject matter of his works […] the daily lives of ordinary
people. (Gottlieb, 228.)
* * *
…the “comedy” lies in the disparity between aspiration and reality, or
between desire and fulfillment. In most cases, there is little to stop the
characters from doing what they want—except themselves. And this,
centrally, is where the keynote of Chekhov’s comedy lies.
Lead your students in a discussion of their experience A Seagull in the Hamptons in light of
Gottlieb’s elucidation of the nature of Chekhovian comedy. Questions might include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Do you understand Gottlieb’s explanation of Chekhovian comedy and
can you appreciate it having read and/or seen one of Chekhov’s plays?
Explain your response.
Can you think of any moment from the play/performance that provides
a good model for Gottlieb’s theses? What are they?
Were there any moments in A Seagull in the Hamptons that you found
to be comical in the popular (vs. Chekhovian) sense of the word?
Explain your answer.
What “human diseases” are plaguing the characters of A Seagull in the
Hamptons and what might prove the proper treatment for each?
[Another approach to the preceding question is: What does each
individual character in A Seagull in the Hamptons want and what
stands in the way of them getting it?]
4. A SEAGULL IN THE BLOGOSPHERE. Either as a class or individually, have your students access
McCarter Theatre's web site (www.mccarter.org) to post their thoughts about A Seagull in
the Hamptons on McCarter’s Blog. The blog has been designed to connect McCarter
Theatre and its staff (production, literary, artistic, education, etc.) with subscribers,
students, educators and anyone interested in reading and writing about theater, and it
provides an up-to-the-minute forum for news and information on McCarter plays in preproduction, rehearsal, and performance. Students can access the blog at
www.mccarter.org/blog/index.php and select "A Seagull in the Hamptons" under
"Categories" to read archived and recent postings, post questions and comments on
previous bloggers' entries and share their own experience of the play.
5. A SEAGULL IN THE HAMPTONS: THE REVIEW. Have your students take on the role of theater
critic by writing a review of McCarter Theatre’s production of A Seagull in the Hamptons.
A theater critic or reviewer is essentially a “professional audience member,” whose job is
to provide reportage of a play’s production and performance through active and descriptive
language for a target audience of readers (e.g., their peers, their community or those
interested in the arts). Critics/reviewers provide analysis of the theatrical event to
provide clearer understanding of the artistic ambitions and intentions of a play and its
production; reviewers often ask themselves, “What is the playwright and this production
attempting to do?” And, finally, the critic offers personal judgment as to whether the
artistic intentions of a production were achieved, effective and worthwhile. Things to
consider before writing:
ƒ
Theater critics/reviewers should always back up their opinions with
reasons, evidence and details.
ƒ
The elements of production that can be discussed in a theatrical review are
the play text or script (and its themes, plot, characters, etc.), scenic
elements, costumes, lighting, sound, music, acting and direction (i.e., how
all of these elements are put together). [See the “Theater Reviewer’s
Checklist”.]
ƒ
Educators may want to provide their students with sample theater reviews
from a variety of newspapers.
ƒ
Encourage your students to submit their reviews to the school newspaper
for publication.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
The Hamptons:
Dolgon, Corey. The End of the Hamptons: Scenes from the Class Struggle in America’s
Paradise. New York: New York University Press, 2005.
Fearon, Peter. Hamptons Babylon: Life Among the Super-Rich on America’s Riviera.
Secaucus, NJ: Carol Publishing Group, 1998.
Harrison, Helen A. and Constance Ayers Denne. Hamptons Bohemia: Two Centuries of
Artists and Writers on the Beach. San Francisco: Chronicle Books, 2002.
Long, Robert. De Kooning’s Bicycle: Artists and Writers in the Hamptons. New York:
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005.
Turner, Newell and Lockhart Steele, eds. Hamptons Havens: The Best of Hamptons
Cottages and Gardens. New York: Bulfinch Press, 2005.
Anton Chekhov:
Bartlett, Rosamund. Chekhov: Scenes From A Life. London: The Free Press, 2004.
Callow, Philip. Chekhov: The Hidden Ground. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1998.
Chekhov, Anton. The Plays of Anton Chekhov. Trans. Paul Schmidt. New York:
HarperPerennial, 1999.
Gilman, Richard. Chekhov’s Plays: An Opening into Eternity. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1995.
Gottlieb, Vera and Paul Allain, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Chekhov. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Hellman, Lillian, ed. The Selected Letters of Anton Chekhov. Trans. Sidonie Lederer.
Hopewell, NJ: The Ecco Press, 1994.
Rayfield, Donald. Anton Chekhov: A Life. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1997.
Senelick, Laurence. The Chekhov Theatre: A Century of the Plays in Performance.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997.